Skip to content
Download this judgment as PDF
  1. Log in with a plan that includes downloads.
  2. Click Download on the judgment page.
  3. Save the PDF to your device for offline reading or filing.

The Queen Empress Vs. Sama Papi

The Queen Empress vs Sama Papi

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Dec 17, 1883
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/789110
Citation
Court
Chennai
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

The Queen Empress

Respondent

Sama Papi

Legal References

Reported In
(1883)ILR7Mad287

AI Legal Summary

Get an instant AI-powered legal breakdown - case summary, ratio decidendi, key issues, and more.

Get a quick AI summary
  1. Open any judgment page.
  2. Click the AI Summary tab or button.
  3. Review facts, issues, and holding - verify against the full text before citing.

Excerpt

confession before village magistrate - evidence act, section 25--criminal procedure code, section 164--village cess act (madras act iv of 1864), section 7. - hutchins, j.1. we see no ground to interfere in this case. a village munsif is not a police officer and the district magistrate is not right in inferring from section 7 of the village cess act that he is a police officer. the confession made to him was not, therefore, inadmissible under section 25 of the evidence act, and, since the woman was not in custody at the time (the police had not even come to the village), it cannot be excluded under section 26.* there is no doubt that the woman was dragged out of the water and the magistrate believed the account which she gave to the munsif as to how she got there, and evidently did not believe that the other witnesses were telling the whole truth.*confession made by accused while in custody of police not to be used as evidence.[section 26: no confession made by any person whilst he is in the custody of a police officer, unless it be made in the immediate presence of a magistrate, shall be proved as against such person.]

Full Judgment

Hutchins, J.

1. We see no ground to interfere in this case. A Village Munsif is not a Police officer and the District Magistrate is not right in inferring from Section 7 of the Village Cess Act that he is a Police officer. The confession made to him was not, therefore, inadmissible under Section 25 of the Evidence Act, and, since the woman was not in custody at the time (the Police had not even come to the village), it cannot be excluded under Section 26.* There is no doubt that the woman was dragged out of the water and the Magistrate believed the account which she gave to the Munsif as to how she got there, and evidently did not believe that the other witnesses were telling the whole truth.

*Confession made by accused while in custody of Police not to be used as evidence.

[Section 26: No confession made by any person whilst he is in the custody of a Police officer, unless it be made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate, shall be proved as against such person.]


Save Judgments · Add Notes · Store Search Results · Organize Client Files Start your Free Trial